Pages

Saturday, March 19, 2016

Good morning and Happy Saturday! The Queen will turn 90 on the 21st of April. In anticipation of this milestone event, the Palace has produced a documentary on Her Majesty featuring many tributes to Elizabeth from members of her family, and full of interesting footage, some form behind the scenes. Obviously, we are fans of the Queen around here, but it would be hard to deny that the most exciting element of this video is Kate's participation.

The Queen at 90 Documentary

The program will air on Easter Sunday, but a preview has been released and the royal world is going absolutely wild with excitement. The Duchess of Cambridge was interviewed for the project and she is featured in the preview. In the first short clip, Kate is dressed in her Rebecca Taylor suit, which the princess has worn on a number of occasions, including for her video promoting Mental Health Awareness Week this year, which was so very successful.

In the clip, Kate reveals that George calls the Queen GanGan and said that the Queen has been delighted to have a great-granddaughter. I was interested to hear her talk about the little gifts HM always leaves in the guest rooms when the Cambridges "go to stay." It makes me wonder if Kate is referring to Sandringham and Balmoral only, or if the Cambridges stay at various other palaces at times for weekend getaways, such as Windsor, or even Buckingham Palace. See that part of the preview here:

For the fashion focused among us, the most exciting moment of the clip was abolsutely the short glimpse of this year's Diplomatic Reception. For two years we have seen Kate in a lace McQueen through the window of her Bentley...

...and at last we have seen the design in a more complete form. It is so much more beautiful than I had imagined it!

For some reason, my imagination had created a straight, figure-hugging dress, sort of like her sparkly Jenny Packham, and in my head, the lace extended down the entire dress. Instead, the actual dress is more like the red Jenny Packham from the State Dinner, with a graceful A-line skirt. I am thrilled that the reality is far more beautiful than what I had envisioned. This might be my new favorite evening gown, and I hope she recycles it to an event where we can get glossy high resolution photos.

In addition to the iconic Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara, Kate paired the dress with the two bracelets we first saw at the State Banquet and she is carrying her Jenny Packham "Casa" clutch:

Jenny Packham "Casa"

Kate carried this clutch first to the James Bond Spectre premiere:

Many other members of the Queens family are interviewed, including Harry, William, the York girls, and more. I think this program will draw a wide audience when it airs on Easter Sunday. I am not yet sure what viewing options will be for international readers, but I will update when that information becomes available. You can watch the full clip at the Mirror here. If you missed last night's post on Kate's EACH visit to Holt, you can pop on over to that post here.

111 comments:

Oh. My. God.! The McQueen evening gown is just so beautiful, it is Kate's most stunning evening gown IMO! I had imagined it totally different, too, but I LOVE IT! I really hope we'll get to see full length photos. But here, it Looks more silver and shiny than icy blue (I had always thought it was a very light Baby blue). This is the most beautiful evening gown I've ever seen. And it was great to see the Lovers Knot Tiara in a full photo on her.

The stories she told about George, Charlotte and the Queen were really sweet. I love how this gives us an insight into their lives at Sandringham, Balmoral,... But I think that in the interview where she's wearing her Rebecca Taylor suit, her hair Looks a Little bit too voluminous, as if she had blow-dried it a bit too much.

Do you think the documentary will be posted on Youtube? Here, only Trooping the Colour is broadcast on TV anually.

We have long wanted to get a good look at the blue dress--it's beautiful, and she wears the Cambridge Lover's Knot tiara so well. It looks better than ever against dark hair.The pictures of Prince George chatting to the Queen at Charlotte's Christening, showed that he was close to her.The queen was bent down answering him, which is unusual. On public engagements HM is not easy with children. I felt that was underlined after the Commonwealth Service on Monday. One child gave a bouquet to the Queen, conducted at arms length, but Catherine bent down and chatted to the child giving her a bouquet. The difference has never been more pronounced. Perhaps just the difference 2 generations makes

Something to consider though--the Queen is almost 90, perhaps some days it is not so easy to bend down or lean over if she has arthritis in her knees or hips. The older people I am around have bad days and okay days.

The McQueen dress is stunning and so beautiful on Kate. I would also say it is most gorgeous gown to date - of course it echoes that gorgeous wedding gown. She can't go wrong with lace! The picture itself is so regal, with her handsome husband and future King by her side. I just love that picture itself. I'm very much looking forward to watching this program online here in the states, I love that we are finally getting some insight into Kate's life as a royal as well.

The dress is stunning. I especially like the details we couldn't see clearly in the pictures from the car (i.e. the shoulders and band at the waist). Speaking of details, did anyone else catch at the end of the second clip both Price Philip and Prince William had on the actual garter for their knighthood? I don't think that I've ever seen William wearing his so I thought it was interesting.

I think Kate was going for a modest look here and I can appreciate that. But this dress is horrible. Reminds me of what a child would wear. Looks silly on a grown women. Other ways to go about being very modest.

I have to say that I am disappointed, too. I think it's the sleeves. They are an odd length; too short I think. Also, from the waist down it reminds me too much of her lilac BAFTA gown. The tiara and tiara hair are perfection, though.

I agee Beth. The sleeves are an odd length. They remind me of sleeves on a little girl's dress and the lace edging with the tucks at the shoulder aren't helping. I like her hair and tiara also and was really excited to see the bracelets again. I wonder if they are on permanent loan to her which would be nice. I like the purse too. So, I guess it wasn't a total washout :-)

Bear in mind that this was a diplomatic reception---ambassadors from every country in the world. The dresses will always be a little more subdued, so no one will be offended.The jewels make up for rather reserved clothes, but this was a rather beautiful gown.

I understand that Jean. I really do. Yet, I think one can look subdued and modest while looking sophisticated and au courant at the same time. I agree that the jewels were an absolute necessity on this occasion. I guess we will have to chalk it up to differing tastes. For me, this gown is not one of my favorite Kate gowns at all.

To me the ice blue ball gown looks like it's related to the red Jenny Packham the DoC wore to the banquet for the Chinese visit. The cap sleeves and the high waist. Is it possible this one is not McQueen?

That dress is gorgeous! Like you, Jane, I also was sure the lace was carried through the full length of the dress but this is even better! I too hope we get some full length glossy photos of it because the color is still a bit of a mystery to me. If we can't get the special here in the US maybe it will be posted to Youtube. One can only hope!

I meant to write my comment on this post not the other so i will re-write it. The Cambridge tiara looks great on Kate. In my opinion, I would have liked the tiara to have gone to Prince Harry's future wife. Kate has the engagement ring from Diana. Having harry give the tiara to his wife would have been sweet, that way he could give his wife something that his mother owned. Also is just me, but is Kate's accent stronger in the interview? I know that when i get nervous (i"m from the South) that my southern draw gets stronger?

I don't think we should assume the tiara was given to Kate. Maybe it is William's, maybe the boys have agreed to share it, who knows. Time will tell how many times Kate wears it, and if Harry's future bride ever does. I understand why Kate wore the Halo tiara on her wedding day, but I think it would be lovely if Harry's wife (because Kate didn't) wears it on their wedding day (unless he marries a rich girl whose family has their own tiara). It would be a lovely way to have Diana included in a wedding day.

Kate did seem nervous - she was speaking choppy, not fluidly. I suspect she was nervous, or was having an off day where her thoughts weren't flowing. I think accents aside, our voices can change when we're nervous, stressed, etc.

The tiara actually belongs to Her Majesty. It was given to Diana on her wedding day but given back to the Queen after the divorce. The tiara Diana wore on her wedding day was the Spencer tiara but it actually belonged to her father as the Earl Spencer and now her brother since he has assumed that title. I am sure there is something left for Harry to give his bride from Diana's collection but we aren't yet privy to that information.

I find her hard to understand due to the accent and the choppiness... also the fact that she does not articulate very well, unlike Prince Charles and other members of the Royal Family. She will definitely have to work on that!

I think she'll improve quite a bit. She's been at it for 5 years and they've been at it their whole lives. When Diana started out she could hardly be heard and only said a few sentences. She actually took lessons on public speaking. Of course, she had just turned 20 when she married Prince Charles.

I meant to write my comment on this post not the other so i will re-write it. The Cambridge tiara looks great on Kate. In my opinion, I would have liked the tiara to have gone to Prince Harry's future wife. Kate has the engagement ring from Diana. Having harry give the tiara to his wife would have been sweet, that way he could give his wife something that his mother owned. Also is just me, but is Kate's accent stronger in the interview? I know that when i get nervous (i"m from the South) that my southern draw gets stronger?

Hi Skyler..at the time of this reception BP would not confirm who owns this tiara. I suspect since it has a royal history it reverted back to the Queen when Diana and Charles divorced as did other "historical" jewelry that was not made or purchased specifically for Diana and that does make sense to me. Also I believe I read Harry actually inherited the ring but William asked Harry for it since he was marrying first and Harry agreed. (It's a lovely ring but not all women would want an engagement ring from a marriage that ended in divorce or one that is such a "statement piece" IMO)RE: your other question...Kate's accent does seem to vary but I've not heard her speak enough to have a guess why.

That was the rumor but it has since been determined that William was given the ring and that Harry actually owns Diana's wedding dress. I'm sure there are other things as well. Diana had some beautiful pieces of jewelry that were hers and I'm sure they are available to the boys. The jewels can be made over in any style they want so I don't think Harry will be destitute when it comes to something to give his future bride.

I believe I read that after Diana's death William and Harry each chose a favorite piece to remember her...Harry chose the engagement ring and William took the Cartier Tank Watch. But I am very happy that William ended up with the ring as it was intended to be worn by a future Queen.

royalfan- in some ways to some people, that ring represents a marriage gone wrong;but apparently, not to Diana and not to William. He must treasure it, as does Catherine. A small symbol that speaks loudly and never lets us forget. That may beWilliam's message in giving it to his future wife and future queen. I liked yourthought about the ring being meant for a furure queen.Anon 12:31-Good point. Truth is a multifaceted prism and sometimes as difficult tograsp and hang onto as a baby in a. bath.I do like to think there is such a thing asvarifiable fact, at one time a staple of competent journalism.

Anon 9:53, yes, for some people the ring represents a failed marriage, but in William's eyes it represents his own love for his mother and, of course, Kate. As he has stated, it's his way of keeping her close to it all. (Combined with what I believe is an appreciation for the historical significance of it.)

Anon 9:53 I agree with you on W&K's thoughts toward the engagement ring. I recall Diana had admitting to hand-picking the sapphire herself and the ring design, and saying the Queen paid for it (not Charles) - this ring is then a symbol of what Diana loved. The ring could negatively be attached to a failed union, or it could be attached to a union that produced two children whom both parents love. Like all things in life, if you choose to find the good memories and the Diana in the ring, it was not a tainted piece to pass on.~ A

Charles didn't really enter the equation. The way that ring came about is quite acontrast to the care, history, and romance involved in Phillip's choice for hisElizabeth's ring.Did Diana wear the ring after the separation and divorce?anon 9:53

That's true, royalfan. She chose the ring because of personal taste. I always thought it reflected the beautiful blue of her eyes.

You're right, Anon. 11:38 - Even Andrew took a more romantic approach to the ring he gave Sarah. He designed it himself. Diana wore her rings all through the separation up until the divorce papers were filed.

Gosh! That dress is absolutely beautiful! Stunning! Regal and Perfect!She looks soooooooooooooo goooooooooood on that dress! I never put much thought to it, how it looked and all but it is truly wonderful!One of her best, if not her best look yet!She was born to be Queen!She looks peeeeeeeeeeerfect! So natural like she was meant to be! :D

Wow - the dress is stunning! I agree with you, that we underestimated it, Jane! In the interview, Kate's hair has some kind of 80ies style, and it doesn't suit her very much. I love her locks normally, but there is no reason to repeat any shyle from these years in my opinion..Including Diana's wedding dress and hair and so on.. hahahaha.Looking forward to the rest of the documentary!Have a lovely week!

This is a lovely evening gown, but then McQueen always comes through for Kate on material, execution, and fit. My only quibble is that its too safe. At the same age, even the Queen wore sleeveless, off-the-shoulder, low cut gowns, altho the Queen had more gowns to choose from and Kate may have to cover more bases with hers;; i.e., didn't Malaysia want all ladies to cover their shoulders?

I love the Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara on Kate and think it looks far better on her than it did on Diana. Perhaps this is because Kate has more hair and so can position the tiara farther back, or maybe it simply fits her head size, but I think that some of it is down to the colour of her hair--brunette, as a background, may set the tiara off better than blonde.

OT, but for those interested, wander over to The Express and check out Camilla Tomineys column in todays paper. She professes to have an exclusive--says that a KP spokesman has given her the inside scoop explaining why Kate wasn't at the St. Patricks Day Parade.

Regarding St Patrick's Day Parade, it is obvious Catherine had a previous engagement for one of her charities, and was photographed there. Yet so many are reporting (and complaining) that she "stayed home with her children to miss the Parade".

But even if she had, it's bothersome that the talk implies that staying home with her children is a bad thing. Could it be that the British public--and press are jealous of Prince George and Prince Charlotte, that William and Catherine prefer being with their children to socializing and being photographed away from them??

Read the article, JC. The upcoming overseas trip isn't the first time they have left George. At about 6 months, Kate and William took a vaca by themselves for at least a week. And to suggest that a few hours away from the kids would have hurt, when Kate is pretty much a SAHM with domestic help, that is really galling to people. I am a SAHM and I think it is a silly defense. These comments aren't directed at you, just my thoughts after reading it.

JC, Thanks for bringing attention to the article. It pretty much says what we've all thought was the reason she stayed away.

As to the vacation it was speculated they took by themselves . . . it was never confirmed. Nobody knew where in the Maldives they were and nobody could confirm that Prince George was not with them. No photos of them coming or going. All of the articles about this trip included the phrases "it is believed" or "according to reports" or "are understood." No photos, no proof. And if they did have a babymoon - who cares? I know what the article says but we're taking the word of a reporter, who doesn't actually know them, who listened to a "source" who may or may not actually know them.

I don't know why she gets such criticism for wanting to be home with her family. Why are some people so offended by this? I'm with Jane, the old "taxpayer" complaint - especially from fellow Americans - is just tired. If you can't get past that sentiment then maybe your free time might be better spent following somebody who doesn't irritate you so. I say Bravo to William and Kate for not letting the naysayers bully them into changing their minds about the decision to make their family come first. And, let's face it, what's happening to them right now is that they are being bullied by the press for selfish purposes. How is this different from a playground bully who wants to make him/herself more important in front of their peers?

Belle-- The opening of the charity shop was the *next day* about 20 min from Amner. It lasted about 35 min. That really isn't a good enough reason to miss the shamrock ceremony the day before. Articles published since (like DailyExpress) say KP said she wanted to spend time with her children because of the India trip in 3 weeks and now say the decision was made months ago (ruling out sick children or other sort of emergency.) Also not good enough IMO. There may be a good reason we don't know about but Tominey hasn't provided it except to make it clear this was not a last minute "pull out." Missing more high profile events especially those involving military or war anniversaries tends to be noticed. While women haven't always done the shamrock task (like when the Guard was deployed or when the Queen Mother was 101) fair or not, missing to spend those 2-3 hrs with children IS going to seem inadequate to many people, especially to those who have no choice but to leave their children for work (like military.) Yes, it may be optics more than substance but optics are often a critical part of the whole royalty picture.

JC - I think the tiara looks fine on Kate but Diana wore it the way it was designed to be worn farther forward (consider when it was designed---that would have been the style, I think. ) You can tell that because the pearl drops are not centered and dangle backwards when Kate wore it but hang properly when Diana wore it.

The DM tends to rehash, revive old stories on slow news days. Keeps folks fromfocusing on the fact that other senior royals, including HM, had eventsscheduled the same day that would have been overshadowed by a Kate appearance.

Still no sources named. It could be the janitor at KP or a completely fictionalsource.Not naming doesn't protect an official, reliable source; it protects onewho doesn't want to be held responsible for his words and therefore does not have to provehis statements are true-as well as providing a shield for the royal writer.

Well, if that was the strategy, it certainly did not work as many of the headlines were about Kate. One has to wonder about everyone's advisors! And if HM was worried about Kate getting attention (which I personally find hard to believe) why have her show up for the CD ceremony?

Prioritizing family and taking care of G&C is the current reality; it is NOT an excuse. There's a difference.

With Charles between William and the throne, the Cambridge's have the opportunity to concentrate on their young family. The Queen did exactly that until her father died and she was crowned. Again, it's the reality, not an excuse. Although it IS written about in that manner because of the us vs. them emotion is has the potential to stir.

Thanks, everyone for responding...I really don't know whether to believe the contents of Tomineys article even now--am getting pretty jaded when it comes to the UK tabs! We are given no proof, the so-called *spokesman* remains unknown, and so....Further, if I chose to believe that said conversation took place, how would I know whether said spokesman was to be believed? Since when is it smart to buy into something which obviously could be pure spin?

I share your take, Robin, regarding that imaginary trip W&K took to the Maldives, and always have; I rather think Brit reporters are also in the dark--altho, if one of them had made the story up, I suppose that that particular liar in the gang WOULD know. And, if anyone had managed to get a pic, proving it, it would've showed up online by now--if a Brit reporter had it, he/she has had plenty of time to sell sell it to a European rag. No proof.

Like yourself, my take is that the UK tabs, who've been gently stirring the pot for considerable time, are indeed bullying Kate. Guess its her turn. But the utter lack of regard toward honest reporting is terribly disturbing, I must say. Nevertheless, I intend to continue reading every word they write on Kate--I am feeling quite protective toward her. (Question: Why would anyone want to reign in a country with such a wretched underbelly? Beyond me. I can fully see the psychological damage they oh-so-callously inflict. No wonder William, and no doubt Kate, are determined to protect their children for, I would think, as long as possible. Time for the law to take a stand, at least with regard to minors. Naive as I was, I was so hoping that W&K would elect to keep George and Charlotte out of boarding school until age 13--and maybe they will. Hard to say which would be worse: being shunted off to boarding school at the age of 8, or being, at least occasionally, exposed to the paps and the tabs, but if they live at home longer, they would have each other for comfort. No guarantee, after all, that William would send both to the same school; he might want George to follow in his male-only footsteps.)

Hmm. I didn't notice the tilt of the pearls in the tiara, Iizzie. Something to consider-- perhaps you're correct in thinking that this tiara was designed to be worn as Diana did. But, to me, it always looked in danger of falling from its perch. Personally, I would be tempted to wear it farther back; it might be easier to carry the weight of it, too. In sum, I would choose comfort and assurance that it wouldn't take a dive down my face, and not worry about the angle of the pearls. Good grief, imagine trying to eat at a State Dinner when wearing this tiara in the way it was designed to be placed! Alternatively, I imagine the pearls can be removed at the wearers whim; not sure I would do that, tho--I think it would detract from the look.

Good thing you either have better eyes or a better computer screen than I. :))

I think the Cambridge's priorities and roles are quite understandable given the current situation in the BRF. Unfortunately, most of the coverage of the Cambridge's choices/circumstances appears to have one primary goal, and that is to incite the readers. Then it becomes a question of whether people support the monarchy and appreciate the bigger picture, or do they follow this couple for entertainment value and relish the opportunity to criticize them.

And I am not suggesting that mistakes haven't been made or that their PR doesn't need improvement, but it is possible to state that a decision or PR move was bad without browbeating the couple themselves. Huge difference, IMO.

JC 10:44 AM...Neither good eyes nor a good computer but I grabbed a peek on a large monitor at a friend’s house! I agree it might be more stable and less likely to shift/fall off the way Kate is wearing it but if you look carefully the pearls are not centered in their arches the way they were when Diana wore it. And at the turn of the century when it was designed, I think the style would have been closer to the front and more horizontal on top of the head the way Diana wore it. Of course, didn’t Diana also say this particular tiara always gave her a headache? :)

Yes, lizzie, I believe that is the one Diana reportedly complained about.Also, I wonder if it wasn't originally meant for ceremonial occasions and officialportraits where one is not moving around and bending forward so much. Technically,though, the fork rises o the mouth-the mouth doesn't bend toward the plate.Still a very uncomfortable situation. Placing the tiara more torward the crown areaof the head could help.I wonder if Catherine places the tiara herself or perhaps the hairdresser?Good spot on the wayward pearls!

The Tiara is gorgeous... So maybe as Anon 6:57 said it was really made for a sitting...maybe not a very well made piece of jewelry after all for general use? However not really sure that when this was made any one was focused on how the jewels hung.

Absolutely, royalfan. If the press has a beef it should be with KP and not W&K.

This is the tiara Diana said gave her a headache. She wore it so well though. She had such a thick head of hair that I don't think there was much chance of it sliding off - either that or it was anchored so heavily that the pins were what gave her a headache. I do believe this tiara is made so that the pearls can be removed. It was much heavier when Queen Mary wore it because there were pearls of matching sizes sitting on top of spikes on the tiara as well. It was altered in the early 1900s to its current design which I think looks much better.

I am in total agreement with the "bulling" statements. I also have to shake my head when I read these articles and wonder how some people can not see through the "sources said...", "insiders report....". And other such statements.

I also go back to at what I have seen royalfan elude to at other times and can remember posting on the 17th about the engagements being carried out by the Queen at the London Zoo and Prince Charles on tour and have to question if BP and CH had requested Kate NOT be scheduled to do the engagement. She had done several engagements which overshadowed Charles and Camilla's tour. While it backfired on BP and CH, it was not William and Kate's responsibility. I also wondered if Kate scheduling the EACH event the next day was her way of hopefully quieting the expected fall out from the day before.

I also thought it very interesting to find the media did little coverage of William handing out the shamrocks and then not until late in the evening. Then instead of just reporting on each of the events done by all members of the BRF, the were insessent in their criticism of Kate "making" her the only story.

http://georgiapapadon.com/the-cambridge-lovers-knot-tiara-first-time-worn-by-the-%E2%80%AA%E2%80%8Educhess-of-cambridge/This link I found shows it worn by QM as well as others. Worn at the front of the head was more in the German style from which it was drawn wasn't it? Then the pearls show and hang right. I tend to agree though it isn't a tiara for lots of moving about.

Agree 100% Faith. Reminds me of an old adage I can't quote all of here without violating blog rules. But it's used to refer to ill-conceived attempts at "covering up" possible public goofs. It goes like this: " (Blank) the more you stir it, the more it stinks." And KP sure seems to have stirred alot.

Faith 3:48-what" official" statements? That has been the whole problem. Please provide actual quotes and the official KP source-e.g: KP twitter account; British Monarchy site.If anyone has been inept, it is some royal writers who prefer to quote un-namedsources.I wouldn't even dignify them with the term amateur. Some of them soundmore like five-year-olds complaining to Mummy.

Anon 1:34…Here is a story about William’s ambulance job published nearly 2 yrs ago. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2718691/Heir-Ambulance-Prince-William-job-999-helicopter-pilot-40-000-year-charity-paying-tax-like-rest-us.htmlIt does not name sources BUT I don’t think for a minute that means KP sources did not say these things. (And except for seeing Jason’s name once, I’ve never seen a KP source named.) For one thing, if the DM has always been out to get Will, this article doesn’t show it-- Unless the DM is psychic and knew what would later happen…..that they would move to Amner after saying Will would commute, that Will’s ambulance job would not look like a real “job” at only 20 hrs a week (and no hrs some months like Dec and ½ of Feb and Mar, etc.) I agree with Faith, W&K’s team has done a terrible job. If you wish to believe his PR is ONLY handled through official British Monarchy sites, I can’t persuade you any differently. But in many arenas, good PR is barely noticeable—it’s not successfully accomplished via official sources for anyone (not just royals.) While a poster mentioned Watergate here (and use of unnamed sources) the only thing remotely like Watergate to me is the lesson supposedly learned: “It’s not the crime it’s the cover-up.” I am not saying there is a crime here but the attempts to explain St. Pat’s Day and the ambulance job sure have the flavor of a scramble to cover up. Are all things that have been said true? Of course not, But I think it is unrealistic to assume-- even for W&K-- there isn’t behind-the-scenes work going on. It’s just not going very well.

But..if a statement is attributed to KP it should be traceable-especially official remarks. If the one about her enjoying the event and looking forward ...etc. wasclearly put out by KP, why can't a royal writer's "expectations" remark be traced?That remark encouraged a firestorm response from those who aren't picky aboutwhere they get their news or whether or not it is true.That's what I'm saying.

Of course public relations takes many forms-we have the Queen's taking the train.Great PR. Her reported parsimonious habits.But statements of policy such as Catherine's future plans aren't going to bewhispered in a royal writer's ear, especially one who has lately shown little effort to remain neutral-to put it in the nicest way possible

it was the standard for all white tie events - they are not worn at the Garter Ceremony. This must be the only event where it still occurs because the only other white tie events are state banquets. Frankly, its outdated and I imagine uncomfortable for the men. What a wonderful thing if the Queen stopped this tradition ;)

It would be nice if the reporter looked up the history before writing these articles.Royal Colonels of regiments, Commandants of RAF bases or of ships, do not usually take their spouses when they have engagements with them.The Irish Guards now have the honour of a Royal Colonel, who is perfectly capable of giving out the shamrock.

This gown is a proper princess looking gown.I find it to be fundamentally beautifulp.My quibble with it is the sweet heart neckline,which I just dislike(matter of personal preference).The Duchess seems to gravitate towards it though.It was even an element in her wedding dress.For me my favorite gown debuted by the Duchess is the one that she wore way back to her first public engagement as a royal,the shimmering,pink Jenny Packham.To date I consider it to be a stunning 10 out of 10 for the Duchess.

Robin 12:05-it just flowed.Neither it nor the teal would have worked for thereception. I would also like a redeux on the lilac.I'm afraid I am perfectly happy with four pairs of shoes.Any more and I get confused.Thanks to this blog, I do now enjoy looking at a pretty or interesting foot covering.Why do runway models wear such ugly shoes? I think they actually end up distracting from the garment.

Anon. 6:47 - I agree with you on the runway models and their footwear. They do detract from the garment they're wearing. I would rather see them barefoot than in some of those shoes - and I'm a shoe girl! I love shoes!

Oh wow, that dress, that tiara! She is so pretty! I love when we get to see some "behind the scenes" things. I hope this airs in the US. I love hearing her speak, since I generally only see photos of her.

Earlier someone commented on it being hard to understand Catherine in the interview. I agree, she was not completely forming her words and her accent did sound thicker. Most likely nerves or she always speaks this way and it is only in her prepared speeches that she is more understandable. Ali

I am not a big fan of William and Kate and I should hope that the focus will be on other members of the Royal Family who are more worthy to speak with. For example, the Queen's daughter Princess Anne who is a well-spoken thoughtful, intelligent woman. And Princes Charles and Edward. Sophie as well who is a wonderful daughter-in-law & who is also very eloquent and who clearly admires, respects and quite simply adores the Queen. So I truly hope that this special gives time for one and all, not just William and Kate.

Lol why are you on this page! Teehee sorry but this IS a fan site and you don't seem to think they are worthy. But I am sure there will be loads of other interviews. Just this particular site is focusing on the two.

All members of the RoyalFamily except Edward were interviewed. They are using Kate to promote the documentary and only two of her clips so far. Despite the opinion of 3.16, obviously the media still believes Kate sells;) as opposed to the others.

I'm sure they will be well-represented. Andrew's girls are, apparently. Anne and Sophie, surely. Also, Edward is interesting and well-spoken. Sometimes the closer one is tosomeone, the harder it is to speak of them.William and Catherine are being featured to get people interested-they do draw viewersas they seem to connect well with the public, as does Sophie. The paradox is- William and Catherine are simultaneously being vilified by the rags while being used by BP forpromotion.Makes my head spin.

Found this audio on Kate. I would say she has had some elocution lessons. I personally understood her but have seen many say they have not understood. There is a big difference now and this clip I pasted. I think being taped can be just as scary as being in front of an audience. She is rather 'clipped' in this documentary that is to air. I am it sure about British accents as to regional area. I am familiar with London accent and there is a variety but as to Norfolk. ..Berkshire Midland area etc? I just don't know.

A whole bunch of comments seem to have been removed from here (Jane doing housekeeping? or blogspot glitch?). Anyway, here is the link to the full documentary on Youtube if it hasn't been removed. I watched it earlier today and it was quite interesting.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD7dAsNxmrQ

I loved how at the end when Catherine is talking about her first Christmas gift to the Queen; she almost wells up at the Queens thoughtfulness in trying to include, make her comfortable and part of the family; It has been no small thing to do what Catherine has done.

Connect

Search The Site

Featured Post

The Duchess of Cambridge at Kensington Palace, Feb. 17, 2016 A number of you have reached out to me via social media expressing confusi...

Welcome!

Welcome to the blog! I am Jane Barr and I write From Berkshire to Buckingham. I am an American Anglophile-Francophile (Yes, they can co-exist. :)) I have been following Kate since she began dating William at St Andrews. I began the blog in my favorite Starbucks while living in Los Angeles, CA, just before William and Kate married. See my Welcome page (in the navigation bar) for more about the blog, and follow me on Twitter (@princesskate_GB) and Instagram (@fromberkshiretobuckingham) for more of my royal content.